By Otto
I just read a very long article stating that many of us will
live a lot longer in the near future—maybe past 100, on MSN.
The article looked at some of the changes we can expect from a longer
lifespan—both for ourselves and others.
My fist thoughts are that I would like to live to 100, but
not if I have to take all the advice on healthy living—lots of “nos.”
There is no red meat; no drinking; no smoking; no to sitting
idle and watching too much TV and we should all work to an older age in our
lives—way past the present retirement age from 62 to 70.
Once I start adding up all the negatives I have to wonder if
I really want to live that long. But before we make up our minds let’s look at
the article and it predictions.
Life styles
An important aspect of living longer are the sacrifices we
must make to do it. Some are not so bad, such as education;
The single best
yardstick for measuring a person’s likely life span is education. John Rowe, a
health-policy professor at Columbia University and a former CEO of Aetna, says,
“If someone walked into my office and asked me to predict how long he would
live, I would ask two things: What is your age, and how many years of education
did you receive?”
Since I already have a college degree, a teaching
certificate, a journalism endorsement and half a masters in special education
that I was never able to finish because there were no jobs for me to take, I
already have an education. I’m not sure how that makes me more likely to live
longer, but I choose to believe it will help. After all, since I have the
education—why not?
Other things from that article are less inspirational, such
as the usual trashing of America’s favorite bad habits; drinking alcohol, Smoking
and eating red meat;
Researchers at the
Buck Institute are lean: society’s obesity problems are not in evidence there.
Everyone takes the stairs; elevators are viewed as strictly for visitors. If
there is a candy machine on the 488-acre grounds, it is well hidden. I met some
researchers for lunch in a glass-and-chrome conference room (Buck’s buildings
were designed by I. M. Pei and fairly shout “Give me an architecture award!”).
Lunch was an ascetic affair: water and a small sandwich with greens; no sides,
soda, or cookies. (Brian) Kennedy
says he seldom eats lunch, and runs up to 20 miles weekly. Yet, even doing
everything right by the lights of current assumptions about how to stave off
aging, at age 47, Kennedy has wrinkle lines around his eyes.
Except with regard to
infectious diseases, medical cause and effect is notoriously hard to pin down.
Coffee, salt, butter: good, bad, or neither? Studies are inconclusive. Why do
some people develop heart disease while others with the same habits don’t? The
Framingham Heart Study, in its 66th year and following a third generation of
subjects, still struggles with such questions. You should watch your weight,
eat more greens and less sugar, exercise regularly, and get ample sleep. But
you should do these things because they are common sense - not because there is
any definitive proof that they will help you live longer….
I find the older I get, the less I want to give up things
like red meat. I do eat other foods, vegetables and fish for example, which are
recommended for a healthy diet. But there are times when I really want a large
stake cooked rare. Many of us are not suppose to drink alcohol and that
includes me, due to having had hepatitis for the last decade. But the disease
is gone and I really enjoy a pint of beer or glass of wine now and then. I
don’t get drunk anymore, but I don’t like to have to restrict too much of my
diet. I also like to drink a Coke or Pepsi once in a while and I’m not supposed
to have those either.
I think the real issue is not that people as I don’t want to
live 100 years…I’m sure that would be swell. But the quality of life is just as
important to me as the quantity. I don’t want to do ANYTHING just to live
longer. I want to be happy and comfortable. I am now 59 and I want to enjoy the
years I have left. I’m willing to compromise—healthier foods most of the
time—but at times I eat and drink what I want.
As for our political and economic system—I eventually want a
revolution—in the mean time, everyone has to make adjustments and that doesn’t
mean to just take from one class of people and give EVERYTHING to another. Older
people have a right to the health care they need and fare treatment in the work
place. Don’t expect us to work for more of the years of our lives without fare
treatment with the benefits we deserve.
Economics
One prediction of the future is that older people will
retire later and spend more years in the workforce:
“If medical
interventions to slow aging result in added years of reasonable fitness, life
might extend in a sanguine manner, with most men and women living longer in
good vigor, and also working longer, keeping pension and health-care subsidies
under control. Indeed, the most-exciting work being done in longevity science
concerns making the later years vibrant, as opposed to simply adding time at
the end.”
The big question here is how many of us really WANT to keep
working after the age of 70? For some of us the desire to quit working is less
about our health and more about spending quality time doing things we find more
worthwhile. For me there is a difference in the writing I do that may have a
positive effect on society’s consciousness as opposed to just shit work, such
as putting beans in cans for a factory. We want to feel our lives are not just
making money and being productive but also contributing something positive and
meaningful in society.
There is also the desire for autonomy. To get jobs today,
most employers want
to drug test us. They want to see what we post on social media such as
Facebook. Some companies want to punish their workers for leading unhealthy
lifestyles, such as being overweight or drinking a lot. People can be fired for
political opinions that they express on line. Many employers feel they have a
right to control the moral or religious beliefs of there employees. An example
of that is the recent Supreme
Court decision to let Hobby Lobby refuse to provide certain types of birth
control for their women employees.
Early this year, Otto’s War Room reported on Jim Hillhouse, president of Alpha Testing, that he thinks of his employees as “rebellious teenagers” That is from an interview he gave to NPR in reaction to the US Supreme Court’s decision on Hobby Lobby—where certain birth control medicines violate his religious beliefs.
Early this year, Otto’s War Room reported on Jim Hillhouse, president of Alpha Testing, that he thinks of his employees as “rebellious teenagers” That is from an interview he gave to NPR in reaction to the US Supreme Court’s decision on Hobby Lobby—where certain birth control medicines violate his religious beliefs.
Hillhouse actually said: ‘You
go by my rules if you want to live here.’—in response to any of his
employees who have a disagreement with his anti-choice position. He actually
talked of them as if there were just his children.
Then there is the freedom of speech issue. About a year ago
I reported that
Meagan May was fired from her job for criticizing the military. I often print my
name in Khmer letters to prevent me from getting fired over controversial
things I post online. Other political radicals use pen names. The point is that
we can’t practice full freedom of speech as long as we have a job.
So basically employers control our lives. They seem to
believe that THEY have the right to decide our moral and religious beliefs,
health decisions that affect us and even our political opinions. It is if we
never really get to grow up and leave home. Some even see us as rebellious
teenagers. The only time we get treated as adults is when we retire and they
CAN’T take our living away when we don’t show proper obedience to the states we
live under.
What I want in old age—in retirement is FREEDOM! We don’t need any patronizing parental figures
running our lives.
Politics
“Longer life has
obvious appeal, but it entails societal risks. Politics may come to be
dominated by the old, who might vote themselves ever more generous benefits for
which the young must pay. Social Security and private pensions could be
burdened well beyond what current actuarial tables suggest. If longer life
expectancy simply leads to more years in which pensioners are disabled and
demand expensive services, health-care costs may balloon as never before, while
other social needs go unmet.”
We can see the results of some of these things already. The
whole issue of raising the retirement age is an example of this. The last
generation gets socialized medicine and a small, but adequate pension, along
with other benefits for those above 62. But members of this very generation
want to raise the retirement age to 70 and above. This means young people now
will not have access to all these benefits for eight more of their years. Some
pundits are warning that people over 55 will have a hard time finding jobs if
they lose the job they have before retirement age. Many employers
don’t want to hire people that old. Also people’s health is not keeping up
with the longer lifespan. That means a lot of people will live longer, but they
will have
more expensive medical needs and they won’t have access to Medicare until
the age of 70. This could be a disaster waiting for those who try to retire 20
years from now.
Again from MSN:
“Society is dominated
by the old - old political leaders, old judges. With each passing year, as
longevity increases, the intergenerational imbalance worsens. The old demand
benefits for which the young must pay, while people in their 20s become
disenchanted, feeling that the deck is stacked against them. National debt increases
at an alarming rate. Innovation and fresh thinking disappear as energies are
devoted to defending current pie-slicing arrangements…
The problem of aging leadership
As the population
ages, so do the political powers that be - and they’re aging in place.
Computerised block-by-block voting analysis and shameless gerrymandering -
Maryland’s new sixth congressional district is such a strange shape, it would
have embarrassed Elbridge Gerry - lock incumbents into power as never before.
Campaign-finance laws appear to promote reform, but in fact have been rigged to
discourage challengers. Between rising life expectancy and the mounting power
of incumbency, both houses of Congress are the oldest they’ve ever been: the
average senator is 62 years old; the average representative, 57.
A graying Congress
would be expected to be concerned foremost with protection of the status quo.
Government may grow sclerotic at the very time the aging of the populace
demands new ideas. “There’s already a tremendous advantage to incumbency,” one
experienced political operative told me. “As people live longer, incumbents
will become more entrenched. Strom Thurmond might not be unusual anymore. Many
from both parties could cling to power too long, freezing out fresh thinking.
It won’t be good for democracy.” The speaker was no starry-eyed radical: he was
Karl Rove….”
Again we see a lot of this now. Kansas
Secretary of State Kris Kobach is an example of a politicians working hard
to entrench the Republican Party all across the country with voting
restrictions (disguised as anti-fraud) that are not only being implemented in
Kansas, but he is traveling around the country to help other states enact the
same restrictions. The restrictions affect many minorities, especially new
immigrants who do not always have the proper paper work to prove when and where
they were born.
The Koch Brothers and their allies have been busting unions
and they have been recorded at fundraiser bragging that by “knee-capping
the unions” they can cut into the supporters of the Democratic Party. Many
people are now calling the Republicans and/or the Tea Party as the party of “angry
white men.” And we can add to that “OLD angry white men.”
This phenomenon explains why there are so many politicians
in Wichita, Kansas and nationally who seem incapable of thinking outside the
box. They are rigid and seem oblivious to the changes that have gone on for the
last 30 years such as gay rights, changing views on marijuana and needed
changes in their attitude towards environmental issues. Many of those
politicians are stuck in the past and they are keeping us stuck in there with
them. Our politics seem dominated by dullards
and obvious dolts.
Let US decide how we will
live out our final years.
